I am trying to spec a hypothetical (possibly real) workstation that could handle templates with say 100-200 articulations at the ready, split over multiple instances of Play and Kontakt, along with plenty of room left over for channel strip eqs and so forth. For those who use larger templates, what is your CPU? --like how many cores vs how many instances of Play, how many audio channels, xeon or I7? (I see that shiny new 10-core I7). Is it cheaper/smarter to split this across two machines with VEP? I've used both Mac and PC up until now, and am comfortable with either (I'm also an IT guy by day). I'm pretty sure I know what I need for ram and ssd as well.

Thanks for whatever comments anyone may have.

(It's a shame about some of the internal bandwidth limitations on the old Mac Pro 2010, as OWC is selling these models fully maxed out with xeon x 12 cores (2x6@3.46GHz) for a fraction of the price of a late 2013 Mac)

I am trying to spec a hypothetical (possibly real) workstation that could handle templates with say 100-200 articulations at the ready, split over multiple instances of Play and Kontakt, along with plenty of room left over for channel strip eqs and so forth. For those who use larger templates, what is your CPU? --like how many cores vs how many instances of Play, how many audio channels, xeon or I7? (I see that shiny new 10-core I7). Is it cheaper/smarter to split this across two machines with VEP? I've used both Mac and PC up until now, and am comfortable with either (I'm also an IT guy by day). I'm pretty sure I know what I need for ram and ssd as well.

Thanks for whatever comments anyone may have.

(It's a shame about some of the internal bandwidth limitations on the old Mac Pro 2010, as OWC is selling these models fully maxed out with xeon x 12 cores (2x6@3.46GHz) for a fraction of the price of a late 2013 Mac)

I have about a 120 track template of mostly Hollywood series instruments. My specs are in my signature. I do have multiple mics loaded in some, but not all, of those instances.

I'll be getting a slave machine soon, but I've been working comfortably enough on the Mac Pro.

Just to throw this in - Richard G Ames has been gaining a good reputation on vi-control.net forums for his work of DAW and VI workstation setup.

The key finding from his work is that more cores can in dome instances be better for VI's so long as it doesnt sacrifice clock speed too much. The suggestion of mrdsee of a 10-core overclocked to 4.2ghz would be awesome so long as it is stable. Dont immediately think that higher more cores is better - it is more of a balancing act. On the current Mac Pro Darth Vaders it seems that the sweet spot is the 6-core option of course with PC there are far more configurations to consider. The other thing is to consider what sort of VIs you are using - samples seem to react better to higher clock. So traditional thinking may not be the way to go.

Ill try and link some threads ftom vi-control when I using something other than my phone.

Thanks! I'm mostly going to be using the Hollywood series and the newer Albion instrument ensembles, hopefully leaving me room left over for lots of DSP.

After looking into it further, I may end up using my old MPB as a potential slave computer, go the PC route and just put it together myself.

Xeon may not really be necessary--I don't think there's any stability issues with prosumer chips (if there are I would be curious to know). For the price of a regular 6-core mac I could build a screaming fast PC with an 8-core i7 at 3.2 GHz, 128GB Ram and 2TB of SSD.

The suggestion of mrdsee of a 10-core overclocked to 4.2ghz would be awesome so long as it is stable. Dont immediately think that higher more cores is better - it is more of a balancing act.

Yes, stable OCing is key and on the new 10 core 4.2ghz is about the max most are able to get and still be stable and cool running. It's a matter of the luck of the draw what ones particular chip ends up being able to handle OC wise. I lucked out with my 5820k 6 core in that I got a cool running 24/7 stable operation at 4.5ghz on air cooling(which I wanted) which is higher than the average most have gotten. I actually could get a bit higher clock speed and still be stable but chose to back it off a couple of tenths to keep it off the edge. I also bought, and recommend the CPU insurance. Xeons have high core counts, but are generally slower clock speed wise. Plus they cost more and are not OC'able. It's hard to beat the new consumer CPU's when it comes to OC'ing, bang for the buck, etc when coupled with inexpensive CPU insurance.